Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1997CriLJ2727
ORDERS.C. Mital, J.1. The above named petitioners have filed this bail application Under Section 439, Cr.P.C. in Sessions Case No. 89/96 pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Nagaur Camp Deedwana pertaining to F.I.R. No. 94 dated 14-9-1995, Police Station Khunkhuna Under Sections 302, 364, 365, 176 and 201 I.P.C. The learned Additional Sessions Judge Camp Deedwana has rejected the bail application of the petitioners vide order dated 28-9-1996. The petitioners moved first hail application No. 481/96 along with other co-accused persons, which was allowed to be withdrawn on the request with liberty to file a fresh bail application after the receipt of copies of the statements. The second bail application No. 1068/96 was rejected on 9-9-1996 along with Misc. Petition No. 26/96 Under Section 482, Cr.P.C. challenging the orders dated 25-3-1996 and 26-3-1996 taking cognizance by learned Judicial Magistrate, Deedwana. Now the petitioners have moved this third bail application.2. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1997(2)WLC36; 1996(2)WLN698
M.A.A. Khan, J.1. By their three separate but almost commonly worded judgments and orders of even dates the two court below have found the petitioner guilty of the offence Under Section 409 IPC, convicted him as such and sentenced him to undergo six months R.I. and pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in each of the three cases. Parties, nature of offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner and questions of facts and law involved being common to all the three petitions these were heard together and are now being decided by this common order. The main order shall be placed on the record of Criminal Revision Petition No. 41 of 1993 Modi Singh v. State and a copy thereof on each of the remaining case files.2. Facts, relevant and common to all the three petitions are these: During the years 1973-76 the. petitioner had been working as a 'patwari' in the Revenue Deptt. of the State Govt. from July 12, 1973 to June 7, 1976 he remained posted as Patwari in Patwari Circle No. 26 Sikroda Meena. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1997(2)WLC292; 1996(2)WLN445
R.R. Yadav, J.1. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner questions legality and validity of his dismissal order dated 23.1.90 Annx.29 passed by respondent No. 2 and older dated 19.4.90 Annx.33 passed by respondent No. 3 dismissing his appeal.2. The aforesaid two orders have been challenged by the petitioner on the ground, inter alia, that he was appointed by the General Manager (respondent No. 3) whereas dismissal order has been passed by the Superintending Engineer (Drilling) (respondent No. 2) who is admittedly lower in rank to respondent No. 3. No charge-sheet and materials in support thereof have been supplied during domestic enquiry which has caused serious prejudice to him. He was not afforded reasonable opportunity of hearing and the orders impugned have been passed against the principles of natural justice and fair play.3. The factual genesis of the present case has a chequered history. It is alleged that the petitioner has filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1060 of 1989 b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1996Raj139
ORDERV.K. Singhal, J.1. All these writ petitions are disposed of by this common order because the questions involved in each of them are common.2. In the State of Rajasthan, there are six medical colleges and number of seats sanctioned for admission in 1995 was 600. In the College at Kota five seats are stated to be vacant; four in respect of the quota of Government of India and one has not joined who was given admission. There are 40 seats in BDS College which have all been filled up few of the petitioners here were given admission in BDS and they have claimed admission in MBBS Course which will be considered in the foregoing paras. In the instructions for the guidance of the candidates intending to appear in PMT, 1995, guidelines for admission were also informed and Clause (2) of the guidelines is as under:--' 2. Reservation of seats:(a) 15% of the seats will be reserved for being filled up by All India Entrance Examination to be conducted by an agency of Government of India.(b) Twen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1996(2)WLN266
N.K. Jain, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to be issued to the respondents to transfer the investigation of the F.I.R. No. 170/95 lodged under Section 498A, 304B and 201 IPC, P.S. Behror, dated 20.6.1995 and FIR No. 259/95 dated 8.9.95 under Sections 147, 148, 389/388 IPC of P.S. Behror, District Alwar, Rajasthan to C.B.I. or any other independant investigating agency.2. It is alleged that Smt. Krishna daughter of the petitioner was married with one Sandeep son of Bir Singh, Sarpanch at Behror on 12.12.1994 and within six years of the marriage she expired on 14.6.1996 and there is sufficient material of continuing harassment, torture and demand of dowry on the record to prove that her death was not natural, and on this basis he lodged F.I.R. No. 170/95 dated 20.6.95 at P.S. Behror. The petitioner approached their lordships of the Supreme Court by filling an S.L.P. on 7.5.95 but the same was withdrawn, with a direction to approach the High Court. Now the pet...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (1998)IIILLJ1226Raj; 1996(2)WLN402
M.G. Mukherji, Actg.C.J.1. This special appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated April 17, 1995 passed by a learned Single Judge of our Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5870/1993.2. The Registrar of Trade Unions filed the writ application seeking to quash the judgment and order passed by the learned District Judge, Udaipur dated August 7, 1993. The learned Single Judge was of the view that the learned District Judge has rightly set aside the order cancelling the registration of the respondent-Lake Palace Hotel Karya Karta Union dated September 30, 1991 and in that view of the matter, the learned Single Judge was not inclined to interfere with the judgment and order as passed by the learned District Judge and thus dismissed the application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, the Registrar of Trade Unions and Joint Labour Commissioner was given liberty to proceed under Section 10 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 in accordance with law 3. Mr. K.L. Jasma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1996WLC(Raj)UC379; 1996(2)WLN619
R.R. Yadav, J.1. Facts of the present case are not disputed. It is evident from perusal of the order passed by both the courts-below that a complaint was filed before learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Phalodi for the offence under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act No. 33 of 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act No. 33 of 1989'), which was sent to Station House Officer, Police Station, Phalodi under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. for investigation. After receipt of complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. an FIR was registered and investigation commenced. After investigation, the Investigating Agency submitted a final report: before the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Phalodi.2. Against submission of final report by the Investigating Agency, a Protest Petition was filed by the complainant, which was rejected and final report was accepted by the learned Munsif and Judl. Magistrate Phalodi on 21.1.94.3. Aggrieved against the accepta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : II(1996)DMC272
Rajendra Saxena, J.1. This appeal has been, directed against the judgment dated 16.11.94 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu, whereby he convicted the appellant for offences under Sections 302 and 498A, IPC and sentenced her to undergo life imprisonment on the first count and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-in default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for three months on the second count. He also directed that both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.2. Briefly, the prosecution case is that deceased Smt. Raisa aged 18 years resident of Sikar was married to PW 11 Idris r/o Jhunjhunu about 3 years prior to the ill-fated incident, which occurred at about 430 fun. on 31.3.94 at her husband's house, it is alleged that just two days prior to the incident, PW 3 Sugra mother of the deceased had come to Jhunjhunu and left the latter at her in-law's house. It is alleged that at the time of the incident fee deceased...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1997(2)WLC264; 1996(2)WLN1
N.L. Tibrewal, J.1. This Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated, November 23, 1994 passed by Shri B.D. Gupta, Special Judge (Communal Riots Cases) cum-Additional Sessions Judge, Tonk in Sessions Case No. 36/93 whereby the appellant - Kesar Lal has been convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-. In default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. The appellant - Atma Ram has been convicted under Section 324 read with Section 511 I.P.C. and sentenced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by him.2. The case relates to an incident which took place towards North-West of village Gawri at about 6.30 p.m. on May 20, 1993. One Mukut Singh Rajput died as a result of the assault made on him by the appellant Kesar Lal with an axe. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant Kesar Lal was having his agricultural field near the pasture land of the village and on the day of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1996Raj235; 1996(1)WLN429
ORDERM.A.A. Khan, V.J.1. Heard.2. The present petitioners want to appear at the incoming Pre-Medical Test going to be held on 27-6-1996. Condition No. 3(a) of the guidelines issued by the Examining Body prescribes the minimum age at 17 years for appearing at the said test. Petitioner Ram Lal's age falls short by 9 days, that of Miss Shanti Bishnoi by one year and that of Gyaneshwar Prasad by two months of the aforesaid minimum age of 17 years prescribed for appearing at the aforementioned test.3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the fixation of the minimum age of 17 years is quite arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as it deprives qualified persons from appearing at the preadmission test for a professional course. In this behalf reliance has been placed on the orders passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Petition No. 4480/92 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4586/92 Kumari Puja Arora v. University of ...
Tag this Judgment!